SAN FRANCISCO — A divorced father isn’t entitled to a court hearing to prevent his ex-wife with sole custody of their 14-year-old son from moving to another state, the California Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

In the unanimous decision, the state high court said Anthony Yana presented no initial evidence that his ex-wife’s move from San Luis Obispo to Las Vegas would irreparably harm his son, Cameron.

A trial court judge in 2003 denied Yana’s attempt to gain joint custody of Cameron to stop his ex-wife’s move with her new family. The judge also denied Yana’s request for a hearing on the matter where he intended to argue that his son would suffer in Las Vegas because of that city’s high crime.

Yana conceded that his ex-wife, Nicole Brown, did not intend to move to deprive him of visitation rights or that the move would traumatize Cameron any more than other such “move away” divorce cases.

Brown’s attorney, Jeffrey Doeringer, said the ruling clears up an area of divorce law where many judges were automatically granting requests for hearings that were expensive and emotionally taxing on children who had to testify.

“The cost of such litigation was very significant,” Doeringer said.

“This shows that noncustodial parents will need some juice behind their claims to warrant a hearing.”